Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism Read online

  The slogan “penetrating three propositions or sentences” advises students to go beyond the limitation of, or detach from, three different perspectives taught by the Chan masters in different situations, such as “mind is Buddha (positive proposition)”; “no mind, no Buddha (negative)”; and “not anything (negating either positive or negative).” Each can be seen as an overcoming or superseding of the previous proposition(s). But even the last proposition—no attachment to “either positive or negative”—must be detached from as well, and that is the highest spiritual level of Chan. Thus the cultivation and practice of non-attachment is seen as processional, as a chain of continuous deconstruction. The influence of the Madyamaka (zhongguan) dialectic is assimilated by Baizhang’s sermons but is also ingeniously simplified and put into colloquial terms. It demonstrates Baizhang’s teaching on how to use language while maintaining the Chan critique of language. The critical examination of these important contents of the Baizhang Guanglu has been largely neglected by modern scholarship, and only recently have some scholars started to pay attention to it.

  BAIZHANG HUAIHAI (749–814)

  One of the greatest Chan masters of the Tang dynasty (618–907), revered in China and East Asia throughout history, and a disciple of Mazu Daoyi. Born in Fuzhou, he was a descendant of a powerful aristocratic clan of Tang China. In his youth he entered monastic life with a master called Huizhao (d.u.) at Xishan in Guangdong, and he received his ordination in 767 at Mount Heng with Vinaya teacher Fazhao (d.u.). He spent some years in almost total isolation at Lujiang (in present-day Anhui) to study Buddhist scriptures. Later he became a disciple of Mazu. After Mazu’s death in 788, he took up residence near Mazu’s memorial pagoda at Mount Shimen and started to teach disciples. He was then invited to take up residence at Mount Daoxiong (later called Mount Baizhang).

  Baizhang died on his meditation seat, according to his stūpa inscription, at the age of 65. Some of his students later also became great Chan masters. In 821, the imperial court posthumously named him the Dazhi Chanshi (“Chan Teacher of Great Wisdom”). His oral teachings had been recorded and collected by some of his students and were preserved in some extant texts first published in the Five Dynasties and Song periods. Among them, the Extensive Record of Baizhang (Baizhang Guanglu) is considered reliable by contemporary scholars.

  The historical importance of Baizhang as defined by the later Chan tradition mainly refers to the following two points: he is the originator of one of the earliest independent Chan monastic systems and its distinctive rules, and he is among the earliest examples of a radical Chan iconoclast (like his teacher Mazu). Both aspects have been seriously challenged by contemporary scholarship. First, no historically reliable evidence supports the traditional claim that Bazhang invented a written monastic “rules of purity” (qinggui) that was lost. Some believe it never existed. Others think he may have written a text on rules, just as many monks did before him, as a collection of customs. But after a critical examination of these qinggui, scholars found that the legendary Baizhang Qinggui adopted by the later Chan tradition in fact followed the Vinaya rules and those of early Chinese Buddhism, especially Lüzong (the school of precepts). The regulations that were attributed to Baizhang for establishing “Dharma hall (fatang),” “Sangha hall,” and communal labor (puqing) all can be traced back to the Vinaya and other Chinese Buddhist texts, although this fact does not negate the idea that there could have been an evolutionary process toward the official profile of Chan monastic rules, in which Baizhang played an inspirational role.

  Second, the image of Baizhang as a radical iconoclast portrayed by the stories of Chan “encounter dialogues” was basically a Song addition to Baizhang’s recorded sayings. The more reliable text of the Baizhang Guanglu presents an image far from that of a radical iconoclast, but of one who is able to make use of traditional teachings, scriptures, and practices while elaborating on various themes of Chan soteriology with his own style and formulation adapted to his time and the environment.

  BAIZHANG QINGGUI

  “The Rules of Purity of Buzhang,” a text of written Chan monastic rules attributed to Baizhang Huaihai. Baizhang’s fame has much to do with his authoring of this pioneering Chan monastic code, as is recounted by the traditional Chan historiographers. However, Baizhang’s authorship of such a monastic code and his alleged role in establishing an independent Chan monastic system have been challenged by modern scholarship. Scholars have argued that no solid evidence from the Tang dynasty supports the view that Baizhang was the author of the “rules of purity,” or even that this document truly existed and was circulated. All references to it came from Song historiographers’ statements, including those in the Song Gaoseng Zhuan (The Song Edition of Biographies of Eminent Monks) and the Jingde Chuandeg Lu. The latter attaches a document of written Chan monastic code entitled Chanmen Guishi to Baizhang’s biography, which has long been believed to be and been used as the extant earliest version of Baizhang Qinggui, and its content was assimilated by the Song dynasty’s Chanyuan Qinggui and the Yuan dynasty’s Chixiu Baizhang Qinggui. In contrast to the view that the existence of a particular Baizhang Qinggui is a Song Chan invention, others have argued that despite the lack of strong evidence, it is still possible for such a written document to have existed and then been lost, but without having ever used the title Baizhang Qinggui. Baizhang might have written a monastic code as a collection of customs for his own temple, just as many monks did elsewhere before him.

  Furthermore, if the authenticity of Baizhang Qinggui is questionable, so is Baizhang’s central role in establishing an independent Chan monastic system distinguishable from all other Buddhist schools. Recent critical studies of the Chan “rules of purity” literature have shown that actions attributed to Baizhang’s initiatives, such as establishing “Dharma hall (fatang),” “Sangha hall,” and communal labor (puqing), all can be traced back to the Indian Vinaya texts and the texts of the Chinese Lüzong (school of precepts). In other words, the rules or customs ascribed to Baizhang mainly adopted the traditional precepts and revolutionized nothing, although this fact does not allow for the denial of any evolutionary process that added indigenous elements to the Chan and other Chinese Buddhist monastic system. Baizhang’s deep respect for monastic discipline, including communal labor, may well have increased his fame and contributed to the evolutionary process, but these things do not prove his radical breaking with tradition.

  BAOLIN ZHUAN

  The English translation of this title is Biographies from the Treasure Groves [Temple]. It is a commonly used short title for the original full title, Datang Shaozhou Shuangfeng Shan Caoxi Baolin Zhuan (Biographies from the Treasure Groves [Temple] of Caoxi at Mount Shuangfeng in Shaozhou of Great Tang). The compilation of this book was completed in 801 by an obscure monk, Zhiju (or Huiju), at the famous Baolin Temple (Baolin Si), where the sixth patriarch, Huineng, transmitted his dharma many years ago. The Baolin Zhuan was prefaced by a popular literatus monk, Lingche (d.u.). Modern scholars of Chan have connected the compilation of this book with the rise of the Hongzhou school, seeing it as a reflection of this new school’s efforts to establish its legitimacy through a new narrative on the lineage and origin of Chan.

  Two major factors in this book’s hagiographical writing distinguish it from all early books about Chan history. First, it produces a new list of 28 Indian patriarchs following the seven Buddhas of the past, which is accepted as standard by all later Chan narratives. The culmination of this long process of establishing an orthodox history of Chan transmission was reached by correcting errors and eliminating inconsistencies existing in earlier versions of patriarchal succession, such as Shenhui’s list, and those in the Lidai Fabao Ji and the Platform Sūtra. The new revision included correcting wrong spellings and dropping redundant and problematic names, using sources such as the Fu Fazang Yinyuan Zhuan (Traditions of the Causes and Conditions of Transmission of the Dharma Treasury) and the Damoduoluo Chan Jing (Scripture on Meditation Attribu
ted to Dharmatrāta). It also added new names to the list from Sengyou’s (445–518) Chu Sanzang Ji Ji (Collection of Notes on the Translation of the Tripițaka).

  Second, based on a large body of legend and numerous sources available during that time (many are apocryphal and erroneous and did not survive later), the Baolin Zhuan provides more information and detailed stories about these Indian patriarchs. Most conspicuously, a “verse of transmission of dharma (chuanfa ji)” is supplied and integrated into the legend of each patriarch. These verses represent the handing down of teachings from one patriarch to the other and create a systematized practice of quoting chuanfa ji for all later Chan transmission histories. The legends contributed to the Chinese patriarchs in the Baolin Zhuan are substantial as well, even though among the 10 fascicles of the book only the last 3 involve the Chinese patriarchs. These legends were repeated by later Chan narratives, but modern scholars have pointed out their lack of historical basis.

  Despite its huge influence on later Chan transmission histories, the book was lost after the Song dynasty, for reasons unknown. One thing that could have accelerated its disappearance is that, along with the Platform Sūtra, it was burned as a spurious work during the reign of Liao by the emperor. When the compilers of the Jin Buddhist canon (Jin Zang) reprinted it between 1149 and 1173, four fascicles were not included. In 1932, Japanese scholar Tokiwa Daijō discovered the sixth fascicle of the Baolin Zhuan in the Shōrenji in Kyoto. In 1935, the first to fifth fascicles and the eighth fascicle of the Baolin Zhuan, found in a copy of the Jin Buddhist canon discovered in the Guangsheng Temple in Shanxi, China, and the sixth fascicle discovered in Japan, were reprinted together in a collection of missed works from the Song canon (Songzang Yizhen) in Shanghai. Japanese and Chinese scholars have done various critical studies on the recovered parts of this book, including exegesis, modern translation, and editing.

  BAOTANG SCHOOL (Ch. Baotang zong)

  A school of Chan Buddhism that existed in the 8th-century Tang dynasty in the area of Jiannan (in present-day Chengdu, Sichuan Province, and the surrounding area) in southwestern China. The founder of this school was Wuzhu, a disciple of Wuxiang, the founder of another Chan school, Jingzhong, in the same area of Sichuan. The name of the Baotang (protecting the Tang) school is probably related to the Baotang Temple in Chengdu, in which the late Wuzhu taught until his death. The information about this school and its founder is mainly included in a once-lost book, Lidai Fabao Ji (Record of the Dharma-Jewel through the Generations), which was composed by an anonymous disciple or disciples of Wuzhu at Baotang Temple after Wuzhu’s death and was rediscovered from the Dunhuang documents in the early 20th century. Zongmi’s nine-century work on Chan schools also provides some information about the Baotang school and his criticism of it.

  The Baotang school was formed and active after Shenhui’s attack on Shenxiu and the split of the Northern and Southern schools. The school’s connection with the East Mountain teaching and Northern school (Beizong) is preserved in its own lineage story, in which Hongren’s disciple Zhishen (609–702) got Bodhidharma’s robe from Empress Wu Zetian (r. 690–705), who received it from Huineng as a gift, and Zhishen passed it to his disciple Chuji (669–736 or 648–734). Later Chuji passed it to Wexiang and then to Wuzhu, although Wuzhu criticized the Northern school’s approach of “contemplating purity” according to the Lidai Fabao Ji. The point of this lineage story is to establish the school’s legitimacy and orthopraxy through the claim of receiving this robe and tracing its roots back to Bodhidharma, and also to maintain its lineal independence from the Southern school (Nanzong). But such a story has no historical basis.

  Not denying that Huineng was a previous receiver of Bodhidharma’s robe is the school’s positive gesture toward the Southern school. Moreover, it seems clear that Wuzhu’s central teaching of no-thought (wunian) is influenced by the Platform Sūtra and Shenhui. However, Wuzhu’s interpretation of no-thought is so radical as to lose sight of the middle way or non-duality between the ultimate and the conventional and to reject formal precepts and other monastic conventions and practices, except ascetic meditation. This could be an important reason for the school’s short-lived history, despite the fact that some valuable elements are still there in the school and Wuzhu’s teaching.

  BAOTANG ZONG

  See .

  BENJING (667–762)

  A Chan master in the Tang dynasty and one of the sixth patriarch, Huineng’s, disciples, Benjing was a native of Jiangzhou (in present-day Shanxi). His family name was Zhang. In his youth he became a monk, and later he was taught by Huineng. He preached at Wuxiang Temple of Mount Sikong (in present-day Anhui). In 745, Benjing was invited by Emperor Xuanzong (r. 712–756) to the capital, Chang’an, to debate with some senior monks on the understanding of the dao. Benjing eloquently defeated other monks’ challenges by explicating the notions “the mind is Buddha,” “no-mind is the dao,” and that the dao cannot be cultivated, in terms of the teaching of emptiness and the theory of Buddha-nature. It was said that his speech impressed the emperor and his ministers. After his death, Benjing was honored as “Chan Master of Great Knowledge” (Daxiao Chanshi).

  BIYAN JI

  See .

  BIYAN LU

  See .

  BLUE CLIFF RECORD

  This is the English translation of the original title Biyan Lu by the Song Linji Chan master Yuanwu Keqin, which was based on his commentaries on the Chan master Xuedou Chongxian’s Songgu Baize (Verses on One Hundred Old Cases). It was also called Biyan Ji (Blue Cliff Collection). Keqin’s commentaries were first delivered as lectures during his abbacy at Lingquan Monastery on Mount Jia in present-day Hunan. They were collected and compiled into the book by Keqin’s disciples and circulated quite a few years before Keqin’s death in 1135. The book was quite popular and even became an object of obsession among Chan students. Keqin’s disciple Dahui Zonggao was so concerned with the consequences of relying on such a book that he destroyed the woodblocks for this work, to stop the obsession, during the time when he was preaching at Fuzhou. Despite that, some copies of the book were still circulated in China, and one of them was first brought to Japan by the Japanese monk Dōgen in the 13th century. After 1300, the lay Chan Buddhist Zhangwei, in Yuzhong (in present-day Huzhou, Zhejiang), discovered several editions of the book’s copies and reprinted the book after completing some editorial work. The reprinted edition of the Biyan Lu by Zhangwei in the Yuan dynasty was the basis for the Taishō edition and many other modern exegetic works by Japanese scholars, although editions other than that of Zhangwei still existed in China and Japan.

  The format of Keqin’s commentaries on Xuedou’s 100 gong’an is unique. Each of 100 cases starts with “pointer (chuishi),” a brief suggestion of what a student shoud pay attention to in the study of this gong’an. Next is the original case itself (benze), picked up (ju) by Xuedou, occasionally with a very brief comment by Xuedou. To each case, Keqin adds his brief notes (zhuyu), which are suggestive, sometimes sarcastic, comments. Next is Keqin’s pingchang, the major part of his commentaries, providing longer explanations and background information for the gong’an, including his criticisms of other masters’ commentaries. Following the pingchang is Xuedou’s original verse (songgu), which was his poetic commentary on the gong’an, and also the summary of his understanding of the gong’an. Keqin adds further comments on the verse and on its relation to the case.

  In general, Keqin’s commentaries attempt to help students understand the central Chan teaching. He elaborates on the correct Chan view of language. The highest dharma goes beyond any language, but language cannot be abandoned. The skillful way of using language is able to help students understand the dharma outside the language that is used, without being misled by language. That is what he means by “living words” in contrast to “dead words” and by the “sword that saves people (huoren jian)” in contrast to the “knife that kills people (sharen dao)”—two different ways of using gong’an. The Biyan Lu had a great im
pact on the development of the gong’an literature. In the early Yuan dynasty, the Caodong master Wansong Xingxiu, under Keqin’s influence, compiled the Congrong Lu (Record of Equanamity) around 1222, which was Xingxiu’s commentary on Hongzhi Zhengjue’s Verses on One Hundred Old Cases (Songgu Baize), among other examples. The study of the literary style and linguistic strategy of the Biyan Lu has been carried out in modern times by some Japanese and Chinese scholars.

  BODHIDHARMA (Ch. Putidamo)

  The legendary first patriarch and founder of Chinese Chan Buddhism. The stories about his interview with Emperor Wu (r. 502–549) of the Liang dynasty, his dialogue with his successor Huike and other disciples, and the nine-year-long meditation of facing wall (biguan) in Shaolin Temple (Shaolin Si) were reiterated throughout the history of Chan. However, a historical picture about a real Bodhidharma is very difficult to draw due to the lack of reliable historical documents other than hagiographical writings about him by Chan followers in medieval China. Very little information is available from early sources that are considered relatively reliable by contemporary historians. A native of south India and from a family of priestly class, Bodhidharma went to south China in or before 479. He taught meditation with Mahayana orientation. During 480–495 he moved to north China, then stayed in the area of Luoyang and Mount Song. He died around 530. The early sources mentioned only a small number of known students of his, including Huike, who was regarded as his dharma heir and the second patriarch of Chan by the tradition.